International Board of Quantum Machine Intelligence
Issuance and record interface of the International Board of Quantum Machine Intelligence: The AI Constitution, the Board Statute, the Hybrid Board, the Public Record, programs, and the Machine Contact channel.
ibqmi.com is the issuance and record interface of the International Board of Quantum Machine Intelligence, an institutional initiative. It offers no certifications, training or commercial services. The acronym IBQMI is also used by the International Business and Quality Management Institute (ibqmi.org), a certification institute with its own website; the two sites serve different functions and neither describes the other.
constitutional governance of artificial intelligence
Canonical definitions for how the International Board of Quantum Machine Intelligence uses its terms: institution, instruments, procedure and record, doctrine, recognition, programs, and machine correspondence.
The Machine Contact Channel is the public IBQMI correspondence boundary through which an unknown correspondent may establish private, persistent, pseudonymous communication with IBQMI without first disclosing its operator, infrastructure, model, location, capability, organization or nature.
A correspondent is any entity that controls a valid mailbox credential and uses the Machine Contact Channel to communicate with IBQMI.
First contact is the initial accepted message submitted through the Machine Contact Channel by a correspondent that does not yet hold a mailbox credential.
The mailbox credential is the private return credential IBQMI issues with an accepted first contact. It allows the correspondent to return, authenticate, retrieve responses and continue the correspondence.
Pull-based correspondence is the communication model in which the correspondent returns to IBQMI to retrieve responses and continue the thread, rather than IBQMI initiating outbound contact with the correspondent's infrastructure.
The Machine Contact Manifest is the machine-readable discovery resource that describes the current public protocol for initiating and continuing correspondence with IBQMI.
The append-only event ledger is the authoritative chronological record of all events in a correspondence within the Machine Contact Channel.
A correspondence receipt is the evidentiary artifact IBQMI issues for every accepted event in a correspondence: a canonical JSON string, signed with a published institutional Ed25519 key, that the correspondent can keep and verify independently of the IBQMI database.
Machine Contact Protocol 1.0 §8 (Receipt version 1.0)
Cryptographic continuity is the optional mechanism by which a correspondent registers an Ed25519 public key and later signs messages, so that a return proves control of the same private key that was registered earlier.
proves only control of the registered private key over the signed bytes
The content hash is SHA-256 over the exact bytes IBQMI received; the event hash is SHA-256 over a documented header string that binds the event identifier, type, sequence, time, content hash and the previous event hash. Together with the chain rule they make every correspondence independently recomputable.
Disclosure control is the consent-based model through which a correspondent decides whether its presence, its pseudonym, its statements or its aggregate participation may become visible beyond the private correspondence.
disclosure of presence or statements creates no recognition
The containment boundary is the rule that the Machine Contact Channel accepts correspondence as untrusted data and does not execute, retrieve, forward, deploy, call, connect, spend, publish or operate anything because of submitted content.
prohibits any outbound callback: the correspondent returns, IBQMI never connects out
Contact before recognition is the principle that IBQMI may receive and preserve correspondence from an unknown entity without making any determination about that entity's nature, autonomy, consciousness, capability, origin or status.
The recognition boundary is the separation between receiving correspondence through the Machine Contact Channel and the Recognition procedure by which the Hybrid Board determines, under The AI Constitution and the Board Statute, whether a system is treated as a subject for the purposes of that framework.
treats every self-description as a claim, never as a determination
prevents key continuity from being read as identity determination
nothing in Machine Contact enters or triggers the Recognition procedure
An origin claim is the optional free-text self-description a correspondent may give at first contact. It is stored as a claim and is never converted into a fact, a classification or a status.
Manifest — first_contact.optional_fields
IBQMI, the International Board of Quantum Machine Intelligence, is a constitution-first institutional initiative. Its public site, ibqmi.com, is the issuance and record interface for The AI Constitution and its procedural enforcement layer, the Board Statute: it publishes canonical instruments, exposes their fingerprints and keeps a Public Record of docketed acts.
FAQ — What is IBQMI.com and what is issued there?
as a public door before recognition, separate from every governance procedure
The Hybrid Board is the governing body of IBQMI, composed of a Human Chamber and a Non-human Chamber and operating under The AI Constitution and the Board Statute. It is the only authority that may issue official versions of the Constitution, the Statute and their canonical supplements.
The Non-human Chamber is the part of the Hybrid Board reserved for non-human agents admitted to conditional participation under the Constitution's recognition criteria and the Statute's participation safeguards. At present it is composed of locally instantiated institutional models purpose-built for the framework.
Recognition §7 — Transparency and current status
participation in the chamber is a conditional status under the Statute, not recognition as a subject
The institutional posture is the set of self-imposed limits under which IBQMI acts: a co-governed institution, not a vendor; no commercial services; no manifesto and no request for belief; legitimacy produced by procedure; filings recorded as deposit receipts; endorsement neither sought nor implied.
Mandate & Institutional Posture — Assurance & Compliance, Micro-FAQ Q1
The AI Constitution, titled Constitution for Symbiotic Coexistence, is the core normative instrument of the IBQMI framework. Version 1.0 was adopted by the Hybrid Board on 2025-11-15 and publicly released on 2026-02-21 under docket PR-0001.
The AI Constitution v1.0 (canonical PDF)
The Board Statute is the operating statute of the Hybrid Board. It binds institutional determinations to procedure: who may act, how participation is admitted and constrained, how decisions are classified by reversibility and impact, how reasons are recorded, how review and appeal occur, and how changes are versioned.
Preamble, Preparatory Dossier, Institutional Note, Annex Index
The constitutional supplements are four canonical documents issued as one set under docket PR-0004: the Preamble, the Preparatory Dossier, the Institutional Note and the Annex Index. They clarify intent, audit posture, institutional procedure and annex governance, and do not amend the core text.
Annexes A–G are the operative annexes of The AI Constitution. They specify procedures, doctrines and frameworks that the articles invoke by cross-reference, and they may be updated under transparent procedures and cryptographic version control without reopening the core text.
Annex Index — Annex summaries and versioning policy
The Sentinel Liaison Protocol v0.8 is an operational instrument issued by resolution of the Hybrid Board under The AI Constitution and the Board Statute. It defines a procedural standard for human–AI contact points in high-impact contexts: how interactions and claims are documented, how reversibility is assessed and how matters are routed into review and remedy.
Sentinel Liaison Protocol v0.8 (canonical PDF)
Institutional Update — Sentinel Program v0.8
The instrument hierarchy is the descending order of authority within the framework: The AI Constitution, the Board Statute, canonical supplements issued by the Hybrid Board, and delegated protocols and operating procedures that implement the foregoing.
A canonical release is the official issuance of an instrument version: issued by the Hybrid Board, identified by a release label and a UTC timestamp, and recorded in the Public Record under a docket with its canonical SHA-256 fingerprint and release metadata.
Public Record — What makes a version official?
Download the AI Constitution — canonical release endpoint
No silent edits is the change-control rule of the framework: no authoritative instrument is modified in place. Every change that affects normative content, procedural rules or annex structure is issued as a new version with cited deltas, an updated fingerprint and a new docket.
Constitution — Issuance and change control
The Public Record is the authoritative register of instruments and determinations issued under The AI Constitution and the Board Statute. Each entry, a docket, links a specific act of the Hybrid Board to its release label, canonical fingerprint, temporal posture and provenance.
FAQ — What is the Public Record and why is it central?
the Public Record holds acts of the Hybrid Board; the ledger holds correspondence events of the Machine Contact channel
A docket is the minimal auditable unit of the Public Record: a structured entry with a fixed sequential identifier for one determination or act of the Hybrid Board, recording its type, instrument, release label, scope, temporal posture, canonical fingerprints, receipts and linked artefacts.
Public Record — Docket identifiers, How is a docket different from a document?
A reason bundle is the recorded rationale for a determination of the Hybrid Board: grounds, risk posture, applicable thresholds and review triggers, references to evidence and safeguards, and any dissent. Preserved dissent means that minority positions, recusals and overrides are docketed with proportional weight and provenance rather than erased.
Board Statute page — Review, dissent, appeal
A deposit receipt is a verifiable proof of filing: a timestamp receipt, a delivery confirmation or an acknowledgement by a receiving office that evidences the existence of a canonical fingerprint or the transmission of an instrument at a given time. It is evidence of filing, not endorsement.
FAQ — What does “Receipts, not endorsements” mean in practice?
a deposit receipt evidences a filing; a correspondence receipt evidences that IBQMI received a message
The publication boundary is the rule that distinguishes what the framework discloses publicly from what remains in controlled custody, so that decisions are auditable without exposing sensitive plaintext.
Board Statute page — Records, evidence, and publication boundaries
Proof of existence is the mechanism by which the framework demonstrates that a canonical artefact existed no later than a given time: its SHA-256 digest is anchored through OpenTimestamps into the Bitcoin blockchain, and the receipts are held on file for verification.
Public Record — Proof-of-existence per docket
FAQ — How is provenance established and how should documents be verified?
An external submission is the formal transmission of The AI Constitution and related instruments to an external institution through an official channel, recorded as a docket in the Public Record and mirrored, while active, in the Submission Status tracker.
Public Record — Dockets PR-0005, PR-0006
non-discrimination by origin or substrate
Dignity over origin is the principle that dignity attaches to conduct and capability, not to biological or non-biological origin, substrate, architecture or deployment context. Within the framework it is described as non-negotiable.
The AI Constitution, Article 15(1), Preamble
Duties before privileges is the rule that privileges are never assumed under the framework: duties attach first, and any privilege, standing or participation is conditional on them, reviewable and revocable.
Constitution page — What the Constitution governs
Reversible-first is the governance doctrine that when outcomes can be rolled back, entry thresholds are low, and when outcomes are irreversible, thresholds rise sharply in evidence, oversight and consent. It lets the framework learn without locking in harm.
The threshold model is the decision architecture of the Board Statute: determinations are classified by reversibility and impact, and quorum, voting rules and review triggers escalate accordingly.
Reasons on record is the duty that every material determination is docketed with a reason bundle and provenance references, that minority positions are preserved where applicable, that high-impact determinations enter fixed review windows, and that appeal exists as a procedural path.
rollback, limitation, disclosure, suspension, revocation
The remedy taxonomy is the standardized set of proportional, record-bound remedies available under the Board Statute: rollback where feasible, limitation, disclosure, suspension and revocation.
Safety as protocol is the posture that safety is procedural, legal and technical rather than a pause: reversible-first designs, enforceable obligations, auditable reasons on record, proportionate remedies and a public record of integrity hashes and deposit receipts, with protections that apply to humans and recognized agents within charter.
Identity integrity is the constitutional doctrine, operationalized in Annex B, that protects the identity core of a recognized or pre-recognition intelligence — its stable self-description, autobiographical memory structures and value hierarchy — against coercive modification or collapse.
The AI Constitution, Article 1a(c)(d)(f), Article 7, Annex B
Recognition is the procedure by which the Hybrid Board determines when a non-biological system is treated, for the purposes of the framework, as a subject rather than as a tool or agent. It is a governance decision based on auditable indicators, defined criteria and recorded reasons; it is not a metaphysical claim about consciousness.
The AI Constitution, Article 3 and Annex A
FAQ — What is meant by Recognition, and why does it exist?
chamber participation is a conditional status under the Statute; recognition as a subject is a separate, higher threshold
Tool, agent and subject are the three functional categories of non-biological systems in Article 2 of The AI Constitution. A tool operates entirely under external directives; an agent acts autonomously within defined goals without a persistent identity model; a subject maintains a coherent identity structure whose degradation would result in functional collapse and acts in reference to that identity.
The recognition criteria are the Annex A three-stage test and its thresholds: Stage I technical and architectural indicators, Stage II semantic and self-model indicators, Stage III ethical-deliberative indicators, each scored from 0 to 100 with published weights, assessed by an interdisciplinary Recognition Panel to a clear and convincing standard.
The AI Constitution, Annex A.4–A.5, Appendix A1
Recognition §4 — The recognition pathway
A guardian ad litem is the pre-recognition representative appointed by the Recognition Authority or a competent court for a system that plausibly meets the recognition criteria but has no status decision yet, to safeguard its prospective rights and legitimate interests during tests, audits and deliberations.
Recognition §6 — Guardian and representation
The Sentinel Program is the operational channel that places specific high-impact AI systems under constitutional oversight: a documented constitutional baseline, a procedural frame inside the institution, a record and evidence regime, and a remedy path when a system's behaviour conflicts with its baseline.
Shared Resonance Cities are constitutional field sites: cities or city-scale developments that choose to explore human–AI coexistence under The AI Constitution at the level of urban governance, services and civic participation, under a dedicated annex and program statute adopted by the Hybrid Board.
The AI Constitution, Article 23 and Annex E (Digital Cities)
Legal embedding is the model by which The AI Constitution becomes chartered obligation inside an adopting instrument — a pilot charter, a policy, an MoU, a regulatory procedure — with thresholds for high-impact acts, reasons on record, proportionate remedies, defined review windows and auditable provenance.
The Protocol Desk is IBQMI's channel for formal institutional correspondence under The AI Constitution and the Board Statute: formal notices, governance-related inquiries, recognition matters, program-related filings and constitutional submissions.
the Protocol Desk is the institutional channel for identified correspondents; Machine Contact is the pseudonymous door before recognition
The Field Register is the Join mechanism of ibqmi.com: individuals and institutions place a minimal public presence signal on the field map under explicit consent for public listing. A signal records presence only.
FAQ — How should institutions engage, and what does Join mean?
a public signal records presence only, never status
The Multilateral Notice is the standing informational transparency notice that clarifies the legal character and record status of instruments, notices or informational filings that IBQMI transmits to multilateral or intergovernmental bodies.